Page 1 of 3

smoke

Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:30 am
by Liesbeth
Hi there, concert crowd, I would like to hear your opinion on the following.
I love going to concerts. However, over the last few years I have found that the smoke is bothering me more and more. Used to be that I felt it mostly the day after, but now it even gets to me 'real time'. It means these days I really consider whether I want to see a concert bad enough to put up with the lack of breath, and I pass on stuff that I might have liked to see.

There was talk about a full ban on smoking in bars and venues in the Netherlands, but their lobby has prevented such legislation and instead the government leaves it up to them to come up with solutions. I'd say something could be gained by better ventilation, but I'm not sure it would be enough for me.

I've discussed this with people, and the general opinion is that banning smoking will be the death of all fun, the death of people showing up and eventually the death of venues. And I can see that might well be (yeah, I used to smoke, and yeah, mostly when going out).

So my question would be how this is in those places where smoking is banned (California? New York? are all venues smoke-free or not?). I need some info if I want to fight my fight over here.
All other insights are welcome as well.

Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:59 am
by LoveSickJerk
Smoking has been banned for almost a year here in NY. And for all the hubbubb, people are still going to clubs, still seeing concerts and restuarants. People smoke outside more, so if anything, we've got more patios, and more people hanging around outside in the snowy cold Buffalo winters. Interestingly enough, I pretty much stopped going to Chippewa (our local big bar district) around the time Smoking was first banned. I don't chalk it up to the ban (since I've not been a consistent smoker), I chalk it up to hating the crowds of noisy obnoxious people, and a lack of walking space thanks to new patios.

Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2004 1:19 pm
by Squid
I might be a special case, coz i went from being a smoker to getting very sick because of smoking and then doing a 180 and totally hating it.

but i was still smoking when the ban started up here in California, and while people bitched about it...i think a lot of smokers just went with it. By the time i went to SXSW in TX back in 2001, I was totally used to non-smokin' venues, and the smoke really got to me.

It's weird though, when i go abroad, i guess i just assume it's goign to be smoky, so i kind of tune it out. Until the next morning of course, when I'm hungover and almost puke because my clothes from the night before smell like an ashtray...

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:34 am
by aj
I'm a little disgruntled about the nonsmoking thing. there are ventilation systems that could be installed. there are places that choose to be nonsmoking. it's already required here that a certain percentage of every restaurant is nonsmoking. and now it's eventuallly going to be banned everywhere. I mean, illegal to smoke pretty much anywhere. that just seems extreme to me. I'm not all smoker's rights, but can't a person have the right to choose to smoke?

just because people consider it bad doesn't mean it should be illegal.

but I also hate places that are really smoky. I hate them a lot. but they don't have to be all or nothing.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:00 am
by LoveSickJerk
I think the issue which got the laws passed in NYS is based on second hand smoke. You may choose to smoke, but the people that don't should not be suffering detrimental side effects from what you choose do. The law was weighed based upon the needs of the many, as opposed to the few...no matter what Hollywood or Big Tobacco makes you think, there are less non-smokers than smokers out there. Except where I work. I'm one of maybe 7 people who don't smoke.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 8:19 am
by chelsea
i've always been under the impression that a lot more europeans smoke than do americans. i mean, it does seem like a lot of americans smoke if you spend all your time in rock clubs, but when you think about it, fewer than half of the people there are usually smoking. whereas the two times i've been to europe, i've been quite surprised at how many people in general smoke.

i guess this is no help to the original poster.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:30 am
by aj
LoveSickJerk wrote:I think the issue which got the laws passed in NYS is based on second hand smoke. You may choose to smoke, but the people that don't should not be suffering detrimental side effects from what you choose do. The law was weighed based upon the needs of the many, as opposed to the few...


yes, yes. all of this I know.

but nonsmokers can choose not to go to smoky places. there is a bar in my neighborhood that I won't go to after a certain time because I know it will be incredibly gross and smoky.

the ban works because people can say "well, you shouldn't be smoking anyway."

and ventilation people! why can't they do this? it's not like it isn't possible.

I haven't had a cigarette for 3 days. so I guess what do I care? I just like to have options.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:56 am
by nwheather
There are more nonsmokers than smokers. How else would such legislation get passed?

The EPA study on secondhand smoke is Bullshit. Just ask Penn and Teller. (If you don't get Showtime, you won't get that, so go to sho.com and check it out!)

As aj pointed out, nonsmokers have the choice not to go into a smoky bar, so bar/restaurant/etc. owners should have the choice whether to lose that business or not.

As for the argument about employees' health...I have worked in restaurants and bars across this nation, and I have met very few nonsmoking coworkers there. And again, they can work somewhere smoke-free if they so choose.

Lastly, my POV: I have smoked for about 10 years and will be quitting by year's end. And I will not become one of those ex-smokers that all smokers know are even worse than nonsmokers with the preaching and article-quoting and crap like that. If our experience as ex-smokers has taught us anything, it ought to be empathy for the smoker.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:42 am
by Squid
Hmmm. Liesbeth, you have a knack for timing!

As if on cue:
<i>Liverpool has become the first city in the UK to ban smoking in public places following a decision by councillors. </i>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 758328.stm

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:10 pm
by LoveSickJerk
nwheather wrote:There are more nonsmokers than smokers. How else would such legislation get passed?
As aj pointed out, nonsmokers have the choice not to go into a smoky bar, so bar/restaurant/etc. owners should have the choice whether to lose that business or not.
As for the argument about employees' health...I have worked in restaurants and bars across this nation, and I have met very few nonsmoking coworkers there. And again, they can work somewhere smoke-free if they so choose.
If our experience as ex-smokers has taught us anything, it ought to be empathy for the smoker.


I like the occasional smoke, and wish I could smoke in movie theatres. But all the other arguments about choice are sufficently countered by why should I have my options limited simply because some other folks want to smoke? Smoking is not a right, it is a choice. The right is to clean[er] air, and a toxin free existence. What you choose to do with your air can't hurt the others around you who don't choose to do that with thier air. The choice should not be up to the non-smoker to find a place to live cleanly and toxin free, it should be up to the smoker to find a different place to get thier fix. That's why I agree with the law, but don't really like it.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:49 pm
by aj
so can we ban suv's?

they take up space that normal cars can use and they eat a lot of gas and I imagine create more toxins than fuel efficient cars.

or ban autos altogether? there are certain portions of the lake path here that are too close to lake shore drive and when a person is running, biking, rollerblading, it is difficult to breath because of so much exhaust. especially at rush hour.

where do we stop?

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 2:41 pm
by MoxieVoxie
If you walked thru a bar throwing your drinks on random people just minding their own business, if you didn't get arrested you would definitely get thrown out. Smoking around people is just as invasive.

I occasionally smoke, so I am not someone who is disgusted at the thought of smoking. But I don't like it when I am forced to breath in other people's smoke and go home smelling like ass, and I would never impose my choice to smoke on someone who doesn't. I also don't think a non-smoker should be forced to choose to not go to see a show because it is a poorly ventilated venue. Smokers can simply go outside to smoke...big deal.

The argument that a smoker's rights are being taken away can be equated with a drinker's rights being taken away because they cannot drink in vehicles or many public places.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 2:47 pm
by MoxieVoxie
aj wrote:I'm a little disgruntled about the nonsmoking thing. there are ventilation systems that could be installed.


Many smaller businesses would not be able to afford to install adequate ventilation systems, especially in older buildings. It seems much easier for someone to walk outside for 5 minutes to smoke.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:20 pm
by aj
you obviously don't have to deal with winters.

and plenty of shows do not allow reentry. and bars that are busy on weekends. I imagine the bans have found ways to deal with this, but I have no idea.

I don't care about this as much as it appears. I just don't like people whining about anything lately. deal or don't deal and choose not to go. that's my attitude cuz that's how I deal with places that are really smoky. If I dont like something I just don't participate. I don't try and make laws to get it out of my face.

I don't mean to offend.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 6:06 pm
by Squid
*hugs to aj*

you're not offending anyone. if you don't have strong opinions, ya might as well be dead.

and shit, i'd probably still be smoking if i hadn't gotten sick. I certainly don't think I'm better than anyone else because i don't smoke anymore.

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 6:51 pm
by Betty Felon
Smokers...Non-smokers.... What about the cigarettes themsleves? How do they feel about being banned? How do they feel about being smoked?

Image

These are from a real anti-smoking campaign in Japan.

Image

more: http://www.jti.co.jp/JTI/manner_kokoku/ ... index.html

Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:03 pm
by sour29
aj wrote:I'm not all smoker's rights, but can't a person have the right to choose to smoke?
not when it violates a person's right not to smoke. or inhale second hand smoke.


edit: should've read whole thread before responding. sorry, my point has been stated and restated already.

Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 3:14 am
by Jeroen
dear Lisbeth,

I want to ask you not to fight your fight. For I am a smoker who loves to smoke and while I do agree that other people should not suffer from my delicious addiction I would not enjoy a concert as much when I am thinking about my cigarette.

So for me that means that I would have to fight my fight too. I see only one solution to this possible division of our great country and that is to do absolutely nothing, so if you agree not to fight your good fight, we will still have a good chance to meet at a LW concert.

In a perfect world smoking would be good for you, unfortunate enough we donĀ“t live in the fifties...

Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:17 am
by LoveSickJerk
aj wrote:you obviously don't have to deal with winters.
I don't care about this as much as it appears. I just don't like people whining about anything lately. deal or don't deal and choose not to go. that's my attitude cuz that's how I deal with places that are really smoky. If I dont like something I just don't participate. I don't try and make laws to get it out of my face.


As I've said, I'm not crazy about the law anyway, but I do agree with it. And boy do I have to deal with winters. Folks in Buffalo stand outside, or the patios are heated with cheap space heaters. In Canada, the same measure was passed about the same time last year. People use the patio, or they just go outside. However, there is a loophole in the Canadian law that allows private clubs to allow smoking indoors. The basis of this clause is that if you belong to a private club, you truly agree to whatever goes on inside, including smoking. It is a very fair way to keep smoking in places like, well, Stip Clubs. Stip Clubs have you sign in at the door as a member, so everyone can smoke.

Posted: Thu Oct 21, 2004 6:50 am
by anthropomorphizing_kitty
I say we just have a smokers colony, kinda the way Australia used to be a penal colony. You guys can all just go and have your own continent and smoke till you vomit your black lungs right out of your body.
In general if people want to kill themselves there's not much anyone can do to stop it, but if someone's gonna jump off a building I prefer that they not land on my head.
Two other things, in what universe does it seem to people that stamping out a cigarette on the ground and leaving it is OK?
Second, there is not a fiber in my being that can even begin to comprehend how a person can in good concience smoke around their children. I used to work in a restaurant and people would ask for the smoking section and a high-chair and I felt like beating them over the head with the high-chair. Absolutely intolerable.